Rawlin,

The use case that you described is correct, although the current proposal is a 
standalone feature from the cachekey plugin; the idea behind the feature is the 
ability to tweak TR cache selection in those use cases in order to increase the 
likelihood of cache hits, as Jonathan described. I'll examine the cachekey 
plugin for similarities and see how this feature and the plugin could work 
together.

Jesse

On 9/4/18, 6:22 PM, "Gray, Jonathan" <[email protected]> wrote:

    I think that's correct.  While using the ATS cachekey plugin allows you to 
collapse multiple requests to a single spindle block range, it may only do so 
for requests it was given by TR.  This would allow a similar logic to exist in 
TR to collapse multiple requests to a single cache where normally they would be 
consistent hashed to multiple ATS instances.  It would be nice if this 
functionality could mirror the capabilities of the cachekey plugin so we could 
consistently someday configure them together.  At the moment the proposal is 
more like the deprecated ATS cache_url plugin.
    
    Jonathan Gray
    
    On 9/4/18, 5:14 PM, "Rawlin Peters" <[email protected]> wrote:
    
        Hey Jesse,
        
        Just to clarify the use case for this, is the idea that the origin
        serves the exact same content under variable paths that follow some
        pattern, e.g. /foo/123/bar/index.m3u8 and /foo/321/bar/index.m3u8? And
        pattern-based consistent hashing is meant to be used in concert with
        the Cache Key Manipulation Plugin for ATS so that only a single copy
        of the content is stored per cache?
        
        Thanks,
        Rawlin
        On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 3:13 PM Rivas, Jesse <[email protected]> 
wrote:
        >
        > Hi Traffic Controllers,
        >
        >
        >
        > I am working on a feature that will allow for pattern-based 
consistent hashing in Traffic Router in order to ignore variable parts of a 
request path, such as a zip code, during cache selection to increase the 
likelihood of hashing similar content requests to the same caches.
        >
        >
        >
        > For the implementation, I would like to propose adding a delivery 
service regex field that would go into the CRConfig, and then be leveraged in 
Traffic Router to modify the request path before passing the value to the 
ConsistentHasher to select a cache. More specifically, I would like to use 
regex grouping in order to extract the desirable parts of a request path and 
construct the path to be used for cache selection. Here’s what this would look 
like:
        >
        >
        >
        > For the request paths:
        >
        >                 /foo/123/bar/index.m3u8
        >
        >                 /foo/321/bar/index.m3u8
        >
        >
        >
        > Provided the regex:
        >
        >                 (/.*?)/\d*?(/.*?)(/*.m3u8)
        >
        >
        >
        > Resulting path to use for cache selection:
        >
        >                 /foo/bar/index.m3u8
        >
        >
        >
        > Due to the potentially risky nature of modifying cache selection, I 
plan to include a front-end testing tool for verifying a provided regex against 
a provided request path, so that the user knows that the resulting path is what 
they expect. If the regex does not match against the request path, the original 
request path will be used for cache selection.
        >
        >
        >
        > Here is a summary of the component changes for my proposed 
implementation for the pattern based consistent hashing feature:
        >
        > -new optional field in the delivery_service table, delivery service 
form, crconfig
        >
        > -TR parsing and leveraging regex field from crconfig; unit tests; API 
endpoint for testing tool
        >
        > -TP testing tool that will take a regex and request path, return the 
resulting path to be used for cache selection
        >
        >
        >
        > Please respond with any questions, comments, or concerns.
        >
        >
        >
        > Thanks,
        >
        > Jesse Rivas
        
    
    

Reply via email to